Skip to main content
Internet Archive's 25th Anniversary Logo

Full text of "Evidence for Gamma-Ray Halos Around Active Galactic Nuclei and the First Measurement of Intergalactic Magnetic Fields"

See other formats

Submitted June 11, 2010; revised September 2, 2010 

Evidence for Gamma-Ray Halos Around Active Galactic Nuclei 
and the First Measurement of Intergalactic Magnetic Fields 

Shin'ichiro Ando 
CN ' California Institute of Technology, Mail Code 350-17, Pasadena, CA 91125, USA 

^ \ 

CN ; and 

pQ . Alexander Kusenko 

Department of Physics & Astronomy, University of California, Los Angeles, CA 90095, 


2 ! Institute for the Physics & Mathematics of the Universe, University of Tokyo, Kashiwa, 

^ : Chiha 277-8568, Japan 

kusenkoOucla . edu 




Intergalactic magnetic fields (IGMF) can cause the appearance of halos 
J;Q \ around the gamma-ray images of distant objects because an electromagnetic 

O ! cascade initiated by a high-energy gamma-ray interaction with the photon back- 

ground is broadened by magnetic deflections. We report evidence of such gamma- 
ray halos in the stacked images of the 170 brightest active galactic nuclei (AGN) 
r> \ in the 11-month source catalog of the Fermi Gamma- Ray Space Telescope. Ex- 

c^ \ cess over point spread function in the surface brightness profile is statistically 

significant at 3.5cr (99.95% confidence level), for the nearby, hard population of 
AGN. The halo size and brightness are consistent with IGMF, -Bigmf ~ 10^^^ G. 
The knowledge of IGMF will facilitate the future gamma-ray and charged-particle 
astronomy. Furthermore, since IGMF are likely to originate from the primordial 
seed fields created shortly after the Big Bang, this potentially opens a new window 
on the origin of cosmological magnetic fields, inflation, and the phase transitions 
in the early Universe. 

Subject headings: gamma rays: general — galaxies: active — ISM: magnetic 



Intergalactic magnetic fields (IGMF) had not been measured until now, despite their 
importance for gamma-ray and cosmic-ray astronomy and their likely connection to the 
primordial fields that could have seeded the stronger magnetic fields observed in galaxies, 
Sun, and Earth. This is because IGMF are too small for conventional astronomical probes, 
such as Zeeman splitting or Faraday rotation. Unlike the fields in galaxies, which are believed 
to have been amplified by the dynamo action of the large-scale convective motions of gas, 
the fields in voids remain low, close to their primordial values modified only by the relatively 
small contribution of the fields leaking out of g alaxies (lKronberglll994J : iGrasso fc Rubinstein 
200 ll : IWidrowl l2002t iKulsrud fc Zweibell 120081 ) . The observationa l and theoretical upper 
bounds on IGMF constrain their magnitudes to be below 10~^ G ( iBarrow. Ferreira fc Silk 
19971 ). whereas any value above ~10~^° G is s ufficient to explain the ~ mG Gal actic magnetic 
fields generation by the dynamo mechanism (JDavis. Lilley fc Tornkvistlll999l ). 

One can dete ct such extremely weak fields using high-energy gamma rays ( lAharonian. Coppi fc Volk 

1994 : |Plagalll995l ) . Very energetic photons emitted from active galactic nuclei (AGN) or other 
strong sources produce pairs of electrons and positrons in their interactions with the extra- 
galactic background light (EBL). These pairs up-scatter the cosmic microwave background 
photons to high energies, giving rise to an electromagnetic cascade, and the photons from 
the cascade are detected by gamma-ray telescopes, such as Fermi. Since the trajectories of 
electrons and positrons in the cascade are affected by magnetic fields, a gamma-ray image of 
AGN is expected to exhibit a halo of secondary photons around a bright central point-like 
source (lAharonian et al.lll994j : iDolag et al.ll2009l : iNeronov fc Semikoal2009l ). The central im- 
age is expected to be composed of photons emitted directly from the source with energies 
below the pair production threshold. In addition , delays in arrival times of the secondary 
photons can be used to probe IGMF f|piagalll995l : lAndolbooi Murase et allboosh . Finally, 
at TeV energies, the secondary photons produced in interactions o f cosmic rays with EBL 

may have already been observed by the air Cherenkov telescopes (JEssey fc Kusenkd 12010 
Essev et allboioh . 

Thus far, in TeV range, HEGRA (lAharonian et al.ll200lh and MAGIC flAleksic et al. 

2010|) did not detect any halo component of two bright blazars, Mrk 501 and Mrk 421, 
and they set upper limits on the flux. In particular, the analysis of MAGIC using gamma 
rays above 300 GeV excludes some range of IGMF between 4 x 10~^^ and 10~^^ G. Very 
recently, IGMF above 3 x 10^^^ G were proposed as an e xplanation of non-obser vation by 
Fermi of several AG N known to be bright TeV sources (INeronov fc Vovkl l2010l : see also 
Tavecchio et al.ll2010l ). 

In this Letter, we present evidence of extended images and of IGMF at 3.5a level, based 


on gamma-ray data collected by the Large Area Telescope (LAT) onboard Fermi, in the 
energy range between 1 GeV and 100 GeV. It is consistent with pair-halo scenario with 
IGMF, -BiGMF ~ 10~^^ G. The knowledge on IGMF will facilitate the future gamma-ray and 
cosmi c ray astronomy , and it wi ll open a new window on the origin of cosmol ogical magnetic 

fields ( 1Cornwalllll997l ) , inflation (ITurner fc Widrow^ 

transitions in the early Universe (jVachaspati 



Diaz- Gil et a 

Baym et al. 


1l2008l). and the p hase 

Vachaspatil 120011 ). 

2. Stacked Gamma-Ray Images of AGN 

The individual photon data as well as the 11-month source catalog (lAbdo et al.ll2010aD 
are no w publicly availablejj Among ~700 AGN in the Fermi AGN catalog ( Abdo et al. 

2010bl ). we select 170 AGN that are detected at more than 4.1cr in the highest energy band, 
10-100 GeV, and located at high Galactic latitudes, \b\ > 10°. These sources are likely 
to have a hard spectrum, and produce a large number of TeV primary photons, which is 
necessary for the appearance of the secondary halo. Although each individual AGN produces 
too few photon counts, especially in the highest-energy band, one can dramatically improve 
the statistics by stacking all these 170 AGN maps. We perform the analysis in three separate 
energy bands: 1-3 GeV, 3-10 GeV, and 10-100 GeV, which allows us to study the energy 
dependence of the halos. To obtain source and model maps, we use official Science Tools 
made publicly available by the Fermi team. The photons that we use in the AGN analysis 
are collected between 239557417 s and 268416079 s in the mission elapsed time (MET), and 
they are of "Diffuse" class. 

We use locations of AGN from the 11-month source catalog, i.e., those obtained solely 
by the gamma-ray data. This does not introduce any significant uncertainty of the stacked 
images, because the localization accurac y using gamma ray s is typically much better than 
the size of PSF especially for hard AGN jAbdo et al.lboiObh . 

Figure [T] shows the gamma-ray count maps of stacked 170 AGN and the "best-fit" 
point-source model generated with the Fermi Science Tools as well as point-source catalog, 
smeared only by point spread function (PSF) of LAT (we use the latest "Pass6 version 3" 
instrument response function of LAT) . It is evident that the counts map and the model map 
are not consistent with each other, especially in the 10-100 GeV range. 

^http: //f ermi 


3. Flux and Angular Extent of Halo Component 

We have performed maximum likelihoo d analysis assuming that, in addition to the cen- 


tral point so urces and diffuse backgrounds (IStrong. Moskalenko fc Reimerll2004l : lAbdo et al. 

2010dl ). there is a third component, namely, the halo component, whose spatial extent 

is given by the Gaussian distribution: 

^halo(^^ldo) = ^ii— exp 

where 6 is the angle from the map center, and O^^^i^ is the mean of 6"^ over this distribution 
function, ^^^^j^ = (0^). We fit the histogram of photon counts as a function of 6"^ read from 
the maps by minimizing 

^' = E i^ [Arp,fPp,f(^f) + iVhaioPhaio(^f iCio) + iVbg. -N,]\ (2) 


where N^gf, Ahaio, and 6'haio are treated as free parameters. The index i refers to the i-th 
bin, Ni is the total number of events in this bin, Ppgf is the normalized PSF, and Abg,j is the 
events due to diffuse backgrounds. We fix the backgrounds to the values at 9'^ = 2.025-2.25 
deg^ and 0.233-0.25 deg^ for 3-10 GeV and 10-100 GeV, respectively, in the simulated maps, 
assuming that they are homogeneous. Thus, Npgf and Ahaio are the total numbers of photons 
in the map attributed to the point source and the halo, respectively, and 6'haio is the apparent 
angular extent of the halo component. 

The inclusion of the halo component improves the fit significantly at high energies. The 
minimum x^ over degree of freedom (z/) is Xmin/'^ — 18.8/19 and 13.3/12 for 3-10 GeV and 
10-100 GeV, respectively. In contrast, the "best-fit" point-source model, where Npsi and 
the background amplitude are treated as free parameters, gives Xmin/'^ — 66/20 and 62/13 
for 3-10 GeV and 10-100 GeV, respectively. This clearly shows that, even though we stack 
many AGN, this simple Gaussian halo model gives a very good fit to the data. The surface 
brightness profiles dN/dO"^ of the best-fit halo model are juxtaposed with the data points in 

In Fig. [3]a, we show the allowed regions of 6'haio and /haio at 68% and 95% confidence 
levels. Here /haio is the fraction of the halo photons, i.e., /haio = Ahaio/(Apsf + Ahaio)- The 
best-fit values and la statistical errors for these parameters are 6'haio = 0.49 ± 0.03° and 
/halo = 0.097 ± 0.014 for 3-10 GeV, and ^haio = 0.26 ± 0.01° and /haio = 0.20 ± 0.02 for 
10-100 GeV. For the lowest energy band, 1-3 GeV, only an upper limit on /haio is obtained, 
which is /halo < 0.046 at 95% confidence level. 


4. Eliminating Instrumental Effects 

4.1. Dependence on redshifts and spectra 

We discuss the possibility that these halos could be due to some unknown instrumental 
effect, such as, for example, a possible deviation of LAT PSF from its value measured in 
calibration prior to the launch. To exclude such a possibility, we first consider samples of 
AGN at different redshifts. We divide the 99 AGN with known distances (out of total 170) 
into two groups: a sample of 57 nearby AGN with z < 0.5, and a sample of 42 distant AGN 
with 0.5 < z < 2.5, where z is the redshift of the source. The allowed regions of ^haio and 
/halo for these two samples, both for 3-10 GeV and 10-100 GeV, are shown in Fig. [3|>. The 
statistically significant difference between the two populations shown in this figure implies 
that at least some component of the halos cannot be attributed to instrumental effects. 

We also note that most AGN in the nearby sample at 2; < 0.5 (53 among 57) are c lassified 
as the hardest population of gamma-ray blazars, BL Lac objects (jAbdo et al.ll2010bl Jd). The 

distant sample, on the other hand, consists of 33 fiat-spectrum radio quasars (and 9 others), 
which are known to be softer population. The fact that we measured the brighter and 
more extended additional components for the nearby/hard sample (Fig. ^) is consistent 
with the pair-halo scenario, because the harder AGN radiate more TeV photons that source 
secondary halos as well as they are closer. This cannot be easily understood as instrumental 
systematics, on the other hand, because the true PSF size would have to be an increasing 
function of energy, which is not the case; see discussions in the next subsection. 

As another independent test t o rule out instrume ntal effects, we considered a sample 

of 43 AGN from the same catalog (jAbdo et al.ll2010al ). which produced no photons above 

10 GeV but were detected in the 3-10 GeV band at more than 4.1cr. These sources are 
likely to have a softer spectrum, with a negligible flux of primary photons above the pair 
production threshold. In the absence of pair production, one expects to see no halos. As 
expected, the best fit in the 3-10 GeV band is achieved for /haio = 0, with an upper limit of 
/halo < 0.1 at 95% confidence level. 

4.2. Quantitative estimate of instrumental effects 

The two independent tests described abo ve give one con f idence that instrumental ef- 

fects cannot account for all the observed halos. iNeronov et al.l (J2010l ) repeated our stacking 
analysis and found the same anomalous excess in the 10-100 GeV band. However, they 
argue, "most, if not all, of this excess is due to the imperfect knowledge of the PSF for the 


back-converted gamma-rays." This argument is based on the observation that the extent 
of the Crab pulsar is the same as that of AGN, a nd the excess is diffe rent between front 

and back-converted photons. While we agree with iNeronov et al.l (120101 ) that it is good to 
perform other independent tests, we shall show that their arguments fail to exclude the phys- 
ical halos and overturn the statistical significance of redshift and spectrum tests discussed 
above. To this end, we have performed an alternative analysis, using the observed Crab 
profile as a calibrated PSF template. This confirms our initial conclusion and demonstrates 
that the halos are indeed physical, at 3.5a level. For the analysis, we mainly focus on the 
3-10 GeV band, because the data have more statistical pow er than in 10-100 GeV, as we ll 

as the pre-launch PSF is better calibrated at lower energies ( iBurnett. Kerr. &: Rothll2009[ ) 

In Fig. m we show surface brightness profiles of our nearby and distant samples of AGN, 
where one can see clear difference between the two populations of AGN. In the same figure, 
we also plot the profile of Crabp which appears to be more consistent with the distant AGN 
than the nearby set. The backgrounds have been subtracted from the sources; they were 
estimated based on the large angular regions, where the contributions from both the point 
sources and halos are expe cted to be smal l . We note that the excess of AGN over Crab seen 

in Fig. 4 was not found by lNeronov et al.l (120101 ). who analyzed the data in the 10-100 GeV 

band, which, as mentioned above, lacks statistical power in comparison with the 3-10 GeV 
band used here. 

To proceed with a quantitative analysis, we use this Crab profile as a PSF model in 
this energy range, and regard Crab statistical errors as systematic uncertainties of PSF. For 
example, in angular bin 6^ = 0.225-0.27 deg^, Fermi-LAT received 22 photons from Crab, 
and the background is estimated to be 1.9. This is interpreted as 24% systematic uncertainty 
of PSF in this particular bin. This method is independent of our previous analysis and is 
free of any uncertainties related to pre-launch PSF calibration. 

A possible source of additional systematic uncertainties is an energy dependence of 
PSF. In general, gamma-ray spectra are different between AGN and pulsars, and so are 
expected PSF sizes. However, the detected spectra of both stacked AGN and Crab are 
well approximated by a power law with similar indices; dN/dE^ oc -E~^'^ for nearby AGN 
{z < 0.5), and oc -E~^'^ for Crab, where E^ is the gamma-ray energy. To probe the spectrum 
dependence of PSF even further, we compare the brightness profiles of simulated maps of 
nearby/hard and distant/soft AGN. Both profiles look very similar, while the profile of hard 
AGN is slightly less extended. In angular bin 6"^ = 0.225-0.27 deg^, these AGN profiles differ 
only by 4.4%, which is negligible compared with 24% uncertainty of the Crab-based PSF 

^The Crab profile is obtained from Diffuse-class data for MET = 239557417-302034833 s. 


due to Crab statistics. Finally, we note that the width of the PSF decreases with energy. We 
verified this by comparing Crab images in 3-5 GeV and 5-10 GeV bands, and confirming 
that the former is broader than the latter. Since the spectrum of the nearby AGN is harder 
than that of Crab, the instrumental systematics can only make the AGN image sharper, not 
broader, but the opposite is inferred from Fig. |H Therefore, it is conservative to ignore the 
small systematic uncertainties due to spectrum dependence of PSF. 

Adopting the Crab profile as a calibrated PSF, we quantitatively investigate the excess of 
nearby /hard AGN profiles identified at 9"^ > 0.2 deg^ in Fig. H The PSF and AGN profiles 
are normalized to each other such that they give the same brightness in the innermost 
angular bin, 6"^ < 0.045 deg^. The excess photon counts are iVexcess (6'^ > 0.225 deg^) = 
125 ± 30(stat) ± 21(sys). By taking square root of quadratic sum of the statistical and 
systematic errors as a total error, we find that this excess is of 3.5o" significance. For the 
distant/soft AGN population, on the other hand, the excess is iVexcess (6'^ > 0.225 deg^) = 
— 5±27(stat) ±29(sys), consistent with null hypothesis. Dividing A^excess by the total number 
of PSF counts, we obtain the values of /haio for both AGN populations: 

_ r 0.073 ± 0.017(stat) ± 0.012(sys), for z < 0.5, 
•^^''^° ~ \ -0.002 ± O.Oll(stat) ± 0.012(sys), for z > 0.5. ^ '' 

Clearly, this conclusion using the Crab-calibrated PSF agrees with that based on the pre- 
launch calibration. 

One can go even further and design two separate Crab-calibrated PSFs for two classes 
of photons, namely those that convert in the front layer and those in the back layer of the 
detector. While all of these photons must be used in an analysis, allowing for the differences 
in PSF offers yet another opportunity to find and eliminate some unexpected instrumental 
effects. To this end, we introduce another statistical quantity ^excess = -^excess /-^ps?"^* + 
^e'xTess/^psT'^' whcrc all the A^'s with self-explanatory superscripts and subscripts refer to 
photon counts at 9^ > 0.225 deg^ after the homogeneous backgrounds were subtracted. This 
way, we explicitly include any PSF differences between front and back-converted photons. 
The meaning of (^excess is clear: a value consistent with zero corresponds to absence of physical 
halos. We obtain (^excess = 1.4 ± 0.5(stat) ± 0.2(sys), 2.7cr away from the null hypothesis. 
We also find that the individual values of ^excess for the front and back photons are consistent 
with each other, within errors. 

We have also performed the same analysis for 10-100 GeV. Here, we renormalized the 
Crab and AGN profiles using 9'^ < 0.025 deg^ bin, and counted the excess photons over Crab- 
calibrated PSF in 9^ = 0.075-0.25 deg^. We obtain A^ixclss^^ = 19 ± 13(stat) ± 15(sys) and 
Nexcess = —3.6 ± 9.1(stat) ± 8.2(sys). The excess for nearby/hard AGN is found significant 
at la level. 

5. Implications for Intergalactic Magnetic Fields 

We interpret the size of the halo 6'haio of a few tenths of degree, in terms of the secondary 
photon model, especially paramet ers of IGMF. A simple an alytic model gives the following 

relation between these quantities (JNeronov &: Semikoa l2009l ) : 

5°(l + .)-V-i(,^)"'(J™.), forA^»D„ 

7halo — < / „ N -3/4 / N 1/2 l4j 

0.4°(1 + z)-VV-i (^^) (Jil^)(^) , forA^«D„ 

where r is the optical depth for the TeV photons that produce halo gamma rays, \b are the 
correlation length of IGMF, and De is the energy-loss length of the electrons and positrons 
produced by primary TeV photons. Because the lower-energy secondary photons originate 
from the less energetic electrons and positrons that are deflected by larger angles in IGMF, 
one expects a larger halo size 6'haio at lower energy. As for the dependence on A^, if it is much 
longer than De, then the charged particles can be regarded as propagating in homogeneous 
magnetic fields (equivalent to infinite A^), and therefore, the deflection angle is given by the 
ratio of Df. and the Larmor radius. If Xb is much smaller than Df>, on the other hand, then 


the electrons and positrons propagate by random walk, with deflections proportional to Ag . 

The halo size for the nearby AGN sample is ^haio ~ 0.5-0.8° (Fig. H]). Assuming r ~ 1- 
10 and using an average redshift of the nearby AGN sample, (z) = 0.2, the measured extent 
of the halos is consistent with -Bigmf ~ 10~^^ G. This is the first measurement of the 
strength of IGMF based on a positive detection. With the halo detection also in the 10-100 
GeV band, we would be able to constrain the correlation length by investigating the energy 
dependence of 6'haio- 

At the mean redshift of the nearby AGN sample, the observed halo size of ~0.5-0.8° 
corresponds to 6-10 Mpc. There are no known astrophysical sources capable of producing 
images of such a large size. Therefore, we conclude that the halos of the secondary photons 
provide the only realistic explanation of the data. 

S.A. was supported by Japan Society for Promotion of Science and partially by NASA 
through the Fermi GI Program grant NNX09AT74G. A.K. was supported by DOE grant 
DE-FG03-91ER40662 and NASA ATP grant NNX08AL48G. A.K. thanks Aspen Center for 
Physics for hospitality. 



Abdo, A. A., et al. 2009, Phys. Rev. Lett., 103, 251101 

Abdo, A. A., et al. 2010a, ApJS, 188, 405 

Abdo, A. A., et al. 2010b, ApJ, 715, 429 

Abdo, A. A., et al. 2010c, ApJ, 716, 30 

Abdo, A. A., et al. 2010d, Phys. Rev. Lett., 104, 101101 

Aharonian, F. A., Coppi, P. S., & Volk, H. J. 1994, ApJ, 423, L5 

Aharonian, F. A., et al. 2001, A&A, 366, 746 

Aleksic, J., et al. 2010, preprint flarXiv: 1004. 1093) 

Ando, S. 2004, MNRAS, 354, 414 

Barrow, J. D., Ferreira, P. G., & Silk, J. 1997, Phys. Rev. Lett., 78, 3610 

Baym, G., Bodeker, D., & McLerran, L. D. 1996, Phys. Rev. D, 53, 662 

Burnett, T. H., Kerr, M., & Roth, M. 2009, preprint fllarXiv:0912.3855|) 

Cornwall, J. M. 1997, Phys. Rev. D, 56, 6146 

Davis, A., Lilley, M., & Tornkvist, O. 1999, Phys. Rev. D, 60, 021301 

Diaz-Gil, A., Garcia-Bellido, J., Garcia Perez, M., & Gonzalez- Arroyo, A. 2008, Phys. Rev. 
Lett., 100, 241301 

Dolag, K., Kachelriess, M., Ostapchenko, S., & Tomas, R. 2009, ApJ, 703, 1078 

Essey, W., Kalashev, O. E., Kusenko, A., & Beacom, J. F. 2010, Phys. Rev. Lett., 104, 

Essey, W. & Kusenko, A. 2010, Astroparticle Physics, 33, 81 

Grasso, D. & Rubinstein, H. R. 2001, Physics Reports, 348, 163 

Kronberg, P. P. 1994, Reports on Progress in Physics, 57, 325 

Kulsrud, R. M. & Zweibel, E. G. 2008, Reports on Progress in Physics, 71, 0046091 

Murase, K., Takahashi, K., Inoue, S., Ichiki, K., & Nagataki, S. 2008, ApJ, 686, L67 


Neronov, A. & Semikoz, D. V. 2009, Phys. Rev. D, 80, 123012 

Neronov, A., Semikoz, D. V., Tinyakov, P. G., & Tkachev, I. I. 2010, preprint 
(arXiv:1006.0164 ) 

Neronov, A. & Vovk, I. 2010, Science, 328, 73 

Plaga, R. 1995, Nature, 374, 430 

Strong, A. W., Moskalenko, I. V., & Reimer, O. 2004, ApJ, 613, 962 

Tavecchio, F., Ghisellini, G., Foschini, L., Bonnoli, G., Ghirlanda, G., & Coppi, P. 2010, 
MNRAS, 406, L70 

Turner, M. S. & Widrow, L. M. 1988, Phys. Rev. D, 37, 2743 

Vachaspati, T. 1991, Phys. Lett. B, 265, 258 

Vachaspati, T. 2001, Phys. Rev. Lett., 87, 251302 

Widrow, L. M. 2002, Rev. Mod. Phys., 74, 775 

This preprint was prepared with the AAS E^TJtjX macros v5.2. 

- 11 - 

(a) Counts Map (3-10 GeV) 

Rel. DEC (deg) 

(b) Model Map (3-10 GeV) 

Rel. DEC (deg) 

0.5 359.5 

Rel. RA (deg) 

0.5 359.5 

Rel. RA (deg) 
; I , 

1 r 

10 20 30 40 50 

(c) Counts Map (10-100 GeV) 

Rel. DEC (deg) 

(d) Model Map (10-100 GeV) 

Rel. DEC (deg) 


0.2 0.1 359.9 359.8 

Rel. RA (deg) 

0.2 0.1 359.9 359.8 

Rel. RA (deg) 

J \ \ , 

1 — \ — r 

6 8 10 12 14 

Fig. 1. — Gamma-ray counts and point-source model maps of stacked 170 bright AGN. Upper 
and lower panels are for 3-10 GeV (a and b) and 10-100 GeV (c and d) bands, respectively. 
Left panels (a and c) are the actual data counts of stacked 170 AGN, and the right panels 
(6 and d) show the "best-fit" point-source model (including backgrounds). Pixel size is 0.03° 
(0.01°) for the 3-10 (10-100) GeV band. 







10* - 


_ 1 

1 ' 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 _ 


(a) 3-10 GeV \ 









Background : 



^^ I - 






1 , 1 

1 1 1 1 1 "1 "i ■ 1 1 

0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 
02 [deg2] 

0.05 0.1 0.15 0,2 0.25 
02 [deg2] 

Fig. 2. — Surface brightness profile of the stacked gamma-ray images. Panels a and b are for 
3-10 GeV and 10-100 GeV bands, respectively. Points with error bars are the data, and solid 
histogram is the best-fit model. The dotted, dashed, and dot-dashed histograms represent 
truly point-like source, halo component, and homogeneous diffuse background, respectively. 








10-100 GeV 

3-10 GeV 

J I I I I I I I I I L 

0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 









10-100 GeV 

10-100 GeV 

0.2 0.4 0.6 

^haio [deg] 


Fig. 3. — Allowed regions of halo size 6'haio and fraction of events from halo component /haio- 
a: Contours are at 68% and 95% confidence level obtained with the sample of 170 AGN. The 
best-fit values are marked by the crosses. Lower-right and upper-left contours are for 3-10 
GeV and 10-100 GeV, respectively, b: The same as a but for 99 AGN with known redshifts 
(again, right and left contours are for 3-10 GeV and 10-100 GeV, respectively). Allowed 
regions for nearby 57 AGN {z < 0.5) are shown by solid contours, and those for distant 42 
AGN {z > 0.5) are by dotted contours. 






1 1 1 1 





1 , 1 AGN(z<0.5) 
Lj,j AGN(z>0.5) : 

•1— 1 




i..,..; Crab I 
Pre-launch " 











.^..1=^ .;.. -f ,, i: ^'' .„. 

4 — ^.j. 4 ft". 






1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 z 

0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 

02 [deg2] 

Fig. 4. — Surface brightness profile of AGN and the Crab pulsar as well as pre-launch PSF 
(for Crab) in the 3-10 GeV band. The diffuse backgrounds are subtracted. The profiles are 
rescaled such that the innermost bin has the same brightness, and therefore, units in the 
vertical axis are arbitrary.